President George Bush's adviser on Ireland has pointed to the possibility of splits in the republican movement over the question of an end to all paramilitary activity.
Mr Richard Haass, in endorsing Mr Tony Blair's public call for clarity from the IRA on its paramilitary future, said last night of the republican leadership: "It's a challenge to leadership to try and build a majority in favour in this case for taking some historic steps."
He continued: "I think again what would follow would be historic rewards, but I think we simply reach the point in Northern Ireland where the era of gradualism or incrementalism has run its course, and dramatic steps are what is required.
"Nothing less, quite frankly, will suffice. I am simply hoping that a majority of the republican movement sees this on balance as being in their interest."
Mr Haass said he supported the holding of Assembly elections on May 29th, but he added that he understood arguments as to why they could be further postponed.
"My own view is that it raises the desirability of settling this negotiation because then there is no issue around the elections," he said.
Differences have sharpened between the British government and Sinn Féin following Mr Tony Blair's demand for clarity from the IRA.
There was no indication yesterday of any forthcoming republican response to the Prime Minister's three questions on IRA activity. Sinn Féin denied vehemently that further clarity was needed.
In an interview with The Irish Times, the Northern Secretary said that, although he did not doubt republican commitment to the peace process, more was urgently needed.
Mr Paul Murphy said: "Commitment to the process isn't the same as saying that they are going to end paramilitarism. Ultimately it's about the ending of targeting, training, intelligence-gathering, and surveillance."
But the Sinn Féin chairman, Mr Mitchel McLaughlin, accused the British government of creating a smokescreen designed to provide political cover for the Ulster Unionist leader, Mr David Trimble.
Sinn Féin is clearly annoyed at London's public portrayal of the IRA statement as unclear and ambiguous, at the statement made by Mr Blair in Downing Street on Wednesday and at the growing uncertainty over the Assembly election date.
Speaking in Dublin yesterday, Mr McLaughlin said Mr Blair was being insincere.
"The real issue is that [the IRA statement] is unacceptable to David Trimble. That is what Tony Blair's statement is really about.
"Mr Blair is, in reality, attempting to get a statement from the IRA which will satisfy an Ulster Unionist Council, the same council which moved into the rejectionist camp last year."
He went on: "This is about the exercise of the unionist veto and about unionism being allowed to dictate the pace of the peace process and also, it seems, the holding of Assembly elections.
"It is not about moving us forward collectively.
"We have to be very clear. Any further delay or postponement of the election will only serve to undermine the democratic process and people's rights and entitlements.
He pressed the British government to make clear if the election would go ahead on May 29th or not. He also claimed people wanted to know if Mr Trimble would commit himself to upholding the political institutions or not.
A well-placed Sinn Féin source told The Irish Times the republican response to Mr Blair's statement was "quite measured when you consider what they've done".
"[The British government] should not have done what they did. We could have engaged in that. We could have published the joint declaration - and what would the British have been saying?"
Mr Murphy claimed yesterday that his government supported, he claimed, by the Irish Government and the US administration, was simply seeking unambiguous clarity from the IRA about the future of paramilitary activity.
He added that he wanted to see an election held in a positive environment. It would be much better for that to happen than for a poll to be held in what he called "a complete lack of understanding and clarity of what lies at the end of it".